--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Nov 16, 2006, at 4:30 PM, sparaig wrote:
> 
> > --- In [email protected], Peter <drpetersutphen@>  
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --- suziezuzie <msilver1951@> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I called the Art of Living center in Boulder
> >>> Colorado and spoke with
> >>> an individual who said that the Art of Living
> >>> meditation technique is
> >>> different than the TM technique. He also said that
> >>> there is an
> >>> emphasis on krias (purification practices) and
> >>> pranayama in
> >>> conjunction with meditation. The meditation is
> >>> called SaHaj in which
> >>> the attention is put on the heart along with the use
> >>> of a mantra as
> >>> opposed to TM in which the mantra is effortlessly
> >>> repeated with
> >>> transcending naturally occurring. To say that both
> >>> techniques are
> >>> identical according to this individual is incorrect.
> >>> He knows because
> >>> he was a TMer and learned SaHaj as taught by the Art
> >>> of Living also.
> >>> So at this point, I've decided to go with TM for my
> >>> daughter and hope
> >>> she likes it and sticks to it. This individual also
> >>> mentioned that
> >>> there is no tension between Shankar and MMY, that
> >>> MMY support
> >>> everything Shankar is doing. He also said that
> >>> prices are negotiable,
> >>> students pay half the price and that there is no
> >>> problem if someone
> >>> cannot afford to pay at all. He said that Shankar
> >>> was a secretary of
> >>> MMY's and when he became enlightened, MMY encourage
> >>> Shankar to go off
> >>> and teach with MMY's blessing. That according to
> >>> this person I spoke
> >>> with, there never was a problem with MMY and
> >>> Shankar. I get the
> >>> impression that many of the TMers who went with this
> >>> group were
> >>> looking for a more personal relationship with a
> >>> master/organization
> >>> which is what it sounds like, like what the TM
> >>> organization was back
> >>> in the 60s early 70s, loosely conducted with a Guru
> >>> who is very
> >>> assessable. Mark
> >>
> >> SM is an advanced TM technique. And again, SM is how
> >> MMY taught initiators to teach TM to Indians.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Not according to OTHER TM teachers I've heard make reference to  
> > this, including MMY
> > himelf, by implication.
> 
> But you probably you imagine TM as some canonical, "fixed" entity.  
> You miss completely the continuity of the gnosis.
> 
> But SSRS got it, no ifs ands or buts.
>

Just as you "get it" about TM?


Reply via email to